Conflict and Critical Theories

07-Allan (Social).qxd 11/22/2006 12:22 PM Page 211

CHAPTER 7

Conflict and Critical Theories

Part I: Conflict Theory: Lewis Coser (1913?2003) Ralf Dahrendorf (1929?) Randall Collins (1941?)

Seeing Further: Normal Conflict

What do an argument, the Enron case, bidding on eBay, the civil rights movement, and the U. S. invasion of Iraq have in common? They are all forms of conflict with various levels of intensity and violence. We may only think of war or arguments as conflict, but what the theorists in this first part of the chapter want to point out is that society is rife with conflict--conflict is a general social form that isn't limited to just overtly violent situations. More than that, conflict doesn't necessarily rip society apart. In fact, it might be one of the most important ways that society holds itself together.

Conflict theory has a long history in sociology. Without question, Karl Marx's work in the early to mid-1800s formed the initial statements of this perspective. As you know, Marx was centrally concerned with class and the dialectics of capitalism. He argued that capitalism would produce its own gravediggers by creating the conditions under which class consciousness and a failing economy would come into existence. In this juncture between structure and class-based group experience, the working class revolution would take place.

211

07-Allan (Social).qxd 11/22/2006 12:22 PM Page 212

212----THEORY CUMULATION AND SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

In the early twentieth century, Max Weber formulated a response to Marx's theory. Weber saw that conflict didn't overwhelmingly involve the economy, but that the state and economy together set up conditions for conflict. Of central importance to Weber's scheme is the notion of legitimation. All systems of oppression must be legitimated in order to function. Thus, legitimation is one of the critical issues in the idea of conflict. Weber also saw that class is more complex than Marx initially supposed, and that there are other factors that contribute to social inequality, most notably status and party (or power).

Since that time, a number of efforts have combined different elements from one or both of these theorists to understand conflict. In this chapter, we will consider three of those efforts. Our first theorist is Lewis Coser. Coser's work is interesting for two reasons. First, he intentionally draws the majority of his theoretical ideas from Georg Simmel rather than Marx or Weber. Coser uses Marx and Weber now and then to frame or elaborate upon what Simmel has to say, but by and large Coser (1956) presents "a number of basic propositions which have been distilled from theories of social conflict, in particular from the theories of Georg Simmel" (p. 8). Keep this in mind as we talk about Coser's theory: we could easily substitute Simmel's name for Coser's.

The second reason Coser is remarkable is that he is the first to consider the functional consequences of conflict--other than Simmel, that is. Before Simmel, conflict had been understood as a source of social change and disintegration. Simmel was the first to acknowledge that conflict is a natural and necessary part of society; Coser brought Simmel's idea to mainstream sociology, at least in America. From that point on, sociologists have had to acknowledge that

groups require disharmony as well as harmony, dissociation as well as association; and conflicts within them are by no means altogether disruptive factors. . . . Far from being necessarily dysfunctional, a certain degree of conflict is an essential element in group formation and the persistence of group life. (Coser, 1956, p. 31)

In terms of the history of social thought and the layout of this book, it is interesting to note that Coser (1956) was motivated to consider the functional consequences of conflict to address a deficiency in Talcott Parsons's theory: "Parsons considers conflict primarily a `disease'" (p. 21). In the same vein, it is worthy of note that Coser was a student of Merton's.

Our second theorist is Ralf Dahrendorf. He clearly blends elements from Marx and Weber and he sprinkles in elements from Coser to present a new understanding of conflict in society. From Marx he takes the idea of dialectical change: "social structures . . . are capable of producing within themselves the elements of their supersession and change" (Dahrendorf, 1957/1959, p. viii). If you don't recall Marx's use of the dialectic, I encourage you to look back at Chapter 1.

Dahrendorf also uses Marx's notion of political interests stemming from bipolarized social positions. Remember that Marx argued that capitalism contains only two classes that really matter: the owners and the workers. These two positions are

07-Allan (Social).qxd 11/22/2006 12:22 PM Page 213

Conflict and Critical Theories----213

inherently antagonistic and by their nature dictate different political interests; that is, all workers have the same political interests as do all owners. From Weber, Dahrendorf takes the idea of power and authority. Rather than seeing class as the central characteristic of modern society, Dahrendorf claims that power is the one unavoidable feature of all social relations. In light of the theorists covered in the previous chapter, it's worth noting that Dahrendorf (1957/1959) regards Merton's theories of the middle range as "the immediate task of sociological research" (p. x), and he sees his own theory as a necessary corrective of Parsons's "equilibrium approach."

On the other hand, our third conflict theorist, Randall Collins, is much less concerned with orienting his work around Parsons's project. Rather, Collins (1975) draws on the work of Weber, Durkheim, and Goffman to argue that symbolic goods and emotional solidarity are among the "main weapons used in conflict" (p. 59). This micro-level orientation is a unique and powerful addition to the conflict perspective. Most other conflict theories are oriented toward the macro level. Stratification is generally understood as operating through oppressive structures that limit access and choices (the idea of the "glass ceiling" is a good example), and power is conceived of as working coercively through the control of material resources and methods of social control. Collins also attunes us to a different level of analysis than either Coser or Dahrendorf--the global level of geopolitics where political conflicts are analyzed within the context of history and geography.

Defining Conflict Theory

In general, conflict theory seeks to scientifically explain the general contours of conflict in society: how conflict starts and varies, and the effects it brings. The central concerns of conflict theory are the unequal distribution of scarce resources and power. What these resources are might be different for each theorist, but conflict theorists usually work with Weber's three systems of stratification: class, status, and power. Conflict theorists generally see power as the central feature of society, rather than thinking of society as held together by collective agreement concerning a cohesive set of cultural standards, as functionalists do. Where power is located and who uses it (and who doesn't) are thus fundamental to conflict theory. In this way of thinking about things, power isn't necessarily bad: it is a primary factor that guides society and social relations.

07-Allan (Social).qxd 11/22/2006 12:22 PM Page 214

214----THEORY CUMULATION AND SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

Lewis Coser: The Functional Consequences of Conflict

Photo: ? Reprinted with permission of the American Sociological Association.

The Essential Coser Concepts and Theory: Variation in Conflict

Basic Sources of Conflict Predicting the Level of Violence Concepts and Theory: The Integrating Forces of Conflict Internal Conflict External Conflict Coser Summary

The Essential Coser

Biography Lewis Coser was born in Berlin, Germany, in 1913. His family moved to Paris in 1933 where he studied literature and sociology at the Sorbonne. Because of his German heritage, Coser was arrested and interned by the French government near the beginning of WWII. He later was able to get political asylum in the

07-Allan (Social).qxd 11/22/2006 12:22 PM Page 215

Conflict and Critical Theories----215

United States and arrived in New York in 1941. Coser did his Ph.D. work at Columbia University, where he studied under Robert K. Merton. His dissertation, The Functions of Social Conflict, took conflict theory in a new direction and was later named as one of the best-selling sociology books of the twentieth century by the journal Contemporary Sociology. Coser also authored Masters of Sociological Thought, which became one of the most influential sociological theory books in the English language. In addition, Coser established the Department of Sociology at Brandeis University; founded Dissent magazine; served as president of the American Sociological Association (1975), the Society for the Study of Social Problems, and the Easter Sociological Association (1983); and is honored annually through the American Sociological Association's Lewis A. Coser Award for Theoretical Agenda-Setting. Coser died in July of 2003.

Passionate Curiosity James B. Rule (2003), writing in memoriam for Dissent magazine, said of Coser,

he always considered himself an intellectual first and a sociologist second. His aim was always to make some sort of comprehensive sense of the human condition--a sense of the best that social life could offer and a hardheaded look at the worst things human beings could do to one another, a vision of possibilities of change for the better and an assessment of the forces weighing for and against those possibilities.

Keys to Knowing Crosscutting influences, absolute deprivation, relative deprivation, rational and transcendent goals, functional consequences of conflict, internal and external conflict, types of internal conflict, network density, group boundaries, internal solidarity, coalitions

Concepts and Theory: Variation in Conflict

Coser argues that conflict is instinctual for us, so we find it everywhere in human society. There is the conflict of war, but there is also the conflict that we find in our daily lives and relationships. But Coser also argues that conflict is different for humans than for other animals in that our conflicts can be goal related. There is generally something that we are trying to achieve through conflict, and there are different possible ways of reaching our goal. The existence of the possibility of different paths opens up opportunities for negotiation and different types and levels of conflict. Because Coser sees conflict as a normal and functional part of human life, he can talk about its variation in ways that others missed, such as the level of violence and functional consequences.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download